|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Virgin Islands Governor: Seize Firearms Ahead of Hurricane Irma
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Vitter Amendment, otherwise known as the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006, was passed following the order of the mayor of New Orleans to confiscate firearms in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
David Codrea, writing for Oathkeepers, called this order by the Islands’ governor a “setup for the unconstitutional seizure of Hurricane Katrina all over again. Presumably, if a citizen defies the guard, the escalation of force up to and including lethal will be authorized and ‘legal.’”
Chris Cox, the executive director of the National Rifle Association (NRA), fired off a protest of the threatened illegal and unconstitutional action: |
Comment by:
netsyscon
(9/7/2017)
|
The Governor is sure to set up a massive push back after the storm has past. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|